Share:

Related

Comments

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. — The state school board voted Thursday to strip accreditation from the St. Louis School District and take control of its struggling schools.

The 5-1 vote came after angry students chanting “No Takeovers!” temporarily shut down the meeting. One student was handcuffed by Capitol Police after a brief foot chase.

Under the board’s decision, a transitional, three-person board, formed by state and district officials, will take over the St. Louis schools on June 15. The locally elected board will remain in place but have no power.

The roughly 32,000-student district has struggled academically and financially for years. Its operating budget has shown a negative balance for each of the past four years, and a special state panel appointed to recommend ways to improve the schools recommended that an unelected board run the district.

“This district has been in decline for decades,” Mayor Francis Slay said. “It may take a decade or more to reverse that.”

Many of the students who drove to the Capitol to protest the move said they were concerned that if the district were unaccredited, they would have a difficult time when applying for college.

“This is our future, and they are messing it up when they take away accreditation from us,” said Johnnie Fields, 17, a senior from Gateway High School.

“With the takeover, that will lead to more consequences for the students, more obstacles for going into higher education, and overall it’s just not fair,” added Kaylan Holloway, 15, of Soldan High School.

Jim Morris, a spokesman for the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, said last week that loss of accreditation should not affect students’ scholarships or college acceptance, although he noted the department cannot control decisions by individual institutions.

The district met four of the 14 performance standards set by the state, failing in such areas as middle- and high-school math scores, graduation rates and college placement. Full accreditation requires meeting nine of the standards.

The president of the St. Louis district’s current school board, Veronica O’Brien, had supported the state takeover.

“I think it’s important for them to bring in some new leadership, some new administration and someone who can really turn the district around,” she said. She left the meeting Thursday under police protection.

It seems that in 2003, the St. Louis school board contracted with a private firm, Alvarez and Marsal (not exactly a bastion of liberalism) in an attempt to use business techniques to improve the schools.

Now, more than three years later, the schools have gotten so bad that the state has to take over. Oddly enough, this happened only shortly after a new school board was elected and threw out Alvarez & Marsal.

Then the Republican dominated Missouri State Legislature decided that they had to take over.

This district has been in decline for decades,” Mayor Francis Slay said. “It may take a decade or more to reverse that.”

I guess that statement blows your theory of:

Now, more than three years later, the schools have gotten so bad that the state has to take over. Oddly enough, this happened only shortly after a new school board was elected and threw out Alvarez & Marsal.

out of the water. And Francis Slay is a democrat. Nice try though. Keep fighting the good fight. Courage John, courage.

Never said the schools were terrific before A&M, just that they had run them for the last three years, and the schools got worse.

Then, when the people of St. Louis got fed up and voted in a new board, throwing out A&M, the Republican controlled State Legislature immediately got into the act, blaming the new board for the problems.

I haven’t found out who was running the schools prior to A&M taking over, although I did a bit of looking. It isn’t something I would know right off the top of my head, as I don’t really keep up on St. Louis politics.

So, for more than three years, a private company (not “liberals”) has been running the St. Louis schools into the ground.

Then St. Louis gets a new school board and tosses the private company out, and almost before the new board can get nametags printed, the Republican legislature jumps in and takes over.

No it’s not. It’s one of the worst, if not THE worst, urban school districts in the country. BTW, I could post something about private schools that go bankrupt or embezzled funds or got their accreditation yanked, but what would be the point?

Universal free education made America great! Beginning in the latter half of the 19th century, the idea of universal free public education resulted in the world’s most productive economy and turned America into a superpower. When we needed educated people to design and build factories, machinery, ships, trains, and weapons of war, we had them. When we needed educated people to command infantry companies, aim artillery, drive tanks, fly planes, and steer ships — we had them. We flew to the moon and back in rockets built by public school graduates.

I really don’t see the point of your public-school bashing, Dan. It’s especially ironic given the obviously poor literacy of many of the wingnut posters on this board. This country would be nothing without its system taxpayer-supported public schools. That’s just the way it is, your dogmatic idiocy notwithstanding.

If this is an argument over “contracting out” versus public employees running things, show me an example where privatizing public services have resulted in cost savings or better services. Look at all the problems that privately run prisons are having, for example. One just got shut down in Florida after private guards employed by a private contractor beat an inmate to death. We hear privatization loudly touted as the answer to everything, but everywhere you look, you see governments back away from privatization experiments. Why? Because private contractors, who have the same (or higher costs), less experience, and (unlike government) need to make a profit, are consistently failing to do the things they contracted to do better than public employees at less cost.

Privatizing government services ALWAYS depends on cutting labor costs by paying lower wages and benefits than public employees make. It’s the ONLY place where private contractors can undercut government’s costs. Government has greater buying power and can buy construction materials, equipment, vehicles, etc. for less than private contractors can. So, privatization is nothing more than a CHEAP LABOR philosophy. But you get what you pay for. If you pay low wages, you’re going to have higher turnover. Do you think private contractors will make up for that by investing more in training? No, they deploy people with less (or no) training. You end up with expensive mistakes, poorer service, and in the end taxpayers get less and pay more.

“WASHINGTON — Under President Bush, the Justice Department has backed laws that narrow voting rights and pressed U.S. attorneys to investigate voter fraud — policies that critics say have been intended to suppress Democratic votes.

“Bush, his deputy chief of staff, Karl Rove, and other Republican political advisers have highlighted voting-rights issues and what Rove has called the ‘growing problem’ of election fraud by Democrats since Bush took power in 2000.

“Since 2005, Bush has appointed at least three U.S. attorneys who had worked in the Justice Department’s civil-rights division when it was rolling back longstanding voting-rights policies aimed at protecting predominantly poor, minority voters. Another newly installed U.S. attorney, Tim Griffin in Little Rock, Ark., was accused of participating in efforts to suppress Democratic votes in Florida during the 2004 presidential election ….

“Administration e-mails have indicated Rove and other White House officials were involved in the dismissals and in selecting a Rove aide to replace a U.S. attorney. …

“Several former Justice lawyers … said the division’s political appointees reversed the recommendations of career lawyers in key voting-rights cases and transferred or drove out most of the unit’s veteran attorneys. … Former voting-rights section chief Joseph Rich … said longtime career lawyers whose views differed from those of political appointees routinely were ‘reassigned or stripped of major responsibilities.’ In testimony … this week, Rich said 20 of the 35 attorneys in the voting-rights section have been transferred or have left their jobs since April 2005 and a staff of 26 civil-rights analysts who reviewed state laws for discrimination has been slashed to 10. He said he has yet to see evidence of voter fraud on a scale that warrants voter ID laws, which he said are ‘without exception … supported and pushed by Republicans and objected to by Democrats.’

“Other former voting-rights section lawyers said that during the tenure of Alex Acosta, the division chief from the fall of 2003 until he was named interim U.S. attorney in Miami in the summer of 2005, the department didn’t file a single suit alleging that local or state laws or election rules diluted the votes of African Americans. … Those kinds of cases, Rich said, are ‘the guts of the Voting Rights Act.’

“During this week’s House judiciary subcommittee hearing, critics recounted lapses in the division’s enforcement. A Citizens Commission on Civil Rights study found that ‘the enforcement record of the voting section during the Bush administration indicates this traditional priority has been downgraded significantly, if not effectively ignored.’ …

“Bush administration officials have said no single reason led to the firings of the eight U.S. attorneys. But two who were forced to resign said they thought they might have been punished for failing to prosecute Democrats … or for not vigorously pursuing Republican allegations of voter irregularities ….”

Roger Rabbit Commentary: Republicans know they can’t win elections unless they cheat, and have made enormous investments in suppressing Democratic votes. Rigging elections in their favor is at the heart of the U.S. Attorney scandal. Creating a false public image of “Democrat voting fraud” is icing on the cake, but the primary objective is assuring there will be no interference with the GOP’s dishonest and illegal vote-suppression operations. For an example of how the GOP viciously targeted black soldiers deployed to Iraq for voter challenges, see http://tinyurl.com/jv9nf Republicans have every reason to cover up these operations, because interfering with the voting rights of black voters is a felony under federal law.

“WASHINGTON — The former No. 2 official in the Interior Department on Friday admitted lying to the Senate about his relationship with convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff ….

“J. Steven Griles pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court to a felony for making false statements …. He is the ninth person … to face criminal charges in the continuing Justice Department investigation into Abramoff’s lobbying activities.”

The truth is private schools are better than public schools. Of course it doesnt take much to be better than what we have now. The libs employ half truths,propagand and flat out lies when smearing the private (charter) schools. I love how they compare a charter school for troubled inner city kids to public schools in rich neighborhoods and say there are no difference in test scores. In most cases the charter schools has only been in existence for a year or two. Hilarious. Anything run by liberals will eventually end up in a disaster. The public school are just exibit A. The welfare system is another fiasco.

No it’s not. It’s one of the worst, if not THE worst, urban school districts in the country.

Worse than Detroit, South Central LA, Washington DC? Hey I wonder what all these schools districts have in common???? Hmmmmm. Oh that’s right they are all liberal. Liberals always get thumped on the public shcools. To freakin easy. hehehehehe

Gosh darn. I forgot something. Really important. The main reason St. Louis schools have been in such decline is funding levels. They receive a fraction of those of suburban schools.

A fraction.

There is a certain point where it doesn’t matter whether a school is public or private. If the school gets, say, $4,000 per pupil rather than $12,000, you will see a big difference in the quality of education.

Little things, like the school can’t afford to buy up-to-date books. Or computers. Or even repair the leaky roof.

How is it than in America, where we are supposed to be relatively classless, some children are viewed as worth more — much more — than others?

Here is Washington we are lucky. Public schools aren’t dependent upon local property taxes. The state has stepped in to significantly equalize school funding levels.

That’s the overriding reason you won’t see such disparities in funding, as is so embarrassingly illustrated by St. Louis.

I’m sorry I forgot to tell you that. I was momentarily overcome by a talking point that was sent to me by the RNC.

Communists in Portland burning soldiers in effigy, carrying signs saying “F___ the troops”, defecating on a burning U.S. flag. Yes, question their patriotism. Question it bigtime. These are yours, people. And they’re out of control.

Let’s see. Large urban school districts with a high percentage of low income students tend to do worse on standardized testing than wealthy, suburban districts and even wealthier private schools that can screen out low achieving students.

Why would that be? Must be the liberals’ fault.

As to your comments about charter schools, here are a few interesting comments about charter schools in California:

● Charter high schools lagged behind noncharters in meeting growth targets. Among charters, 64% met targets versus 67% of noncharters, though the results are not statistically significant (meaning they could be the result of random variation).

● Noncharter 10th graders outperformed their charter school counterparts on the California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE)

and here is some from Arizona regarding the (charter) El Dorado High school:

El Dorado is scheduled to receive about $1,151,743.82 from the Arizona Department of Education for Fiscal Year 2006-2007. El Dorado is listed on publicschoolsreview.com as one of the Top 20 Schools in Arizona (listed in 9th place) with the highest expenditure of money per student of $16,644.

Despite the enormous expenditure of taxpayer dollars at El Dorado High School their performance rate indicates nothing but problems. For school year ending June 2006 the promotion rate at El Dorado High School was only 48%, as opposed to 82% for the entire state. They retained 10% of all students at the same grade, as opposed to only 3% in the state pubic schools. They had a high school drop out rate of 32% as opposed to 6% on a state wide level, and they only graduated 43% of their senior high school senior class as opposed to 79% in the states public schools.

and

Only 10% of El Dorado High School Students met state proficiency standards in mathematics, as opposed to 49% of all high school students in the State of Arizona. 35% of El Dorado’s students met state standards in reading compared to 63% of all Arizona high school students, and 39% met state standards in writing, compared to 63% of all Arizona High School students.

There are enough additional examples from all around the country that you must either know about how charter schools are failing, or you simply don’t care enough to do the research.

Either way, we’re done here, except for my telling you that before you disparage the public school system, you should probably take a basic English class (many public schools have night classes for adults). Examples include:

“Hey (insert comma here)I wonder what all these schools (should read “school”) districts have in common????”

Gosh darn. I forgot something. Really important. The main reason St. Louis schools have been in such decline is funding levels. They receive a fraction of those of suburban schools.

A fraction.

There is a certain point where it doesn’t matter whether a school is public or private. If the school gets, say, $4,000 per pupil rather than $12,000, you will see a big difference in the quality of education.

Bullshit!!!

Many public schools get more money if you count transportation and facility costs. In Washington DC the kiddis get 12,000 per kid not counting facilities and transportation. If there is one thing the public schools have proven is how to not educate a child with a lot of money. The private schools can do it better and cheaper.

Either way, we’re done here, except for my telling you that before you disparage the public school system, you should probably take a basic math (many public schools have night classes for adults). Examples include:

If the school gets, say, $4,000 per pupil rather than $12,000, you will see a big difference in the quality of education.

Liberals have no concept of money or math. This is example of how idiotic liberals are.

You have to giggle when cowardly chickenshit chickenhawk Publicans like .18 say things like “we’re done here.” Let me translate. “As a Publican, I reserve the right to tuck my tail between my legs and run like a fucking coward any time I want, just like my pretend president did when the Viet Nam war came calling.”

Yeah, tell that to the 35% of the kids who’s parents send them to private school rather than the Seattle public schools. I doubt it has anything to do with the quality of private schools in the area. The only private schools that would be more expensive than the Seattle public schools would be elite schools like Lakeside or Seattle Prep. Of course the price would go down if we went with school vouchers, “economies of scale” you know.

Hey, I try not to generalize either. I once knew a democrat who didn’t lie in his political campaign for president. It didn’t turn out well for old Mondale, (He won Washington DC and the State of Minnesota barely) but he did told the truth. He actually didn’t win Minnesota,but what the hell, we let him have it anyways.

I never tire of hearing the Publicans pretend to support school vouchers. Why do I say this? A real voucher porgram would cost massive dollars .. like Medicare. Underwrite private schools and Eco 101 tells you that prices will rise and rise and rise.

No problem assuming Publicans are willing to pay the taxes!

Personally, I favor public school diversity. More options so parents can choose. Charter schools and smaller admins. Of course this gets the same reaction from the left as a real voucher program does form the right. Charter schools require no union contracts.

So we has a choice .. impoverished pubic schools a la Publicans or least common denominator achievement thanks to the NEA.

Please Donate

I appreciate feeling appreciated. Also, money.

Currency:

Amount:

Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?

Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!

Search HA

Follow Goldy

HA Commenting Policy

It may be hard to believe from the vile nature of the threads, but yes, we have a commenting policy. Comments containing libel, copyright violations, spam, blatant sock puppetry, and deliberate off-topic trolling are all strictly prohibited, and may be deleted on an entirely arbitrary, sporadic, and selective basis. And repeat offenders may be banned! This is my blog. Life isn’t fair.